InvestorsHub Logo

whizkid

03/23/10 1:14 PM

#21996 RE: t_b1209 #21994

They are really good compared to other similar properties nearby. I see a possible merger, which might bring the PPS up significantly. Just wait and watch.

PROPHET-of-PROFITS

03/23/10 1:15 PM

#22000 RE: t_b1209 #21994

T_B today's trading has stupidity written all over it. UTTERLY DISGUSTED my friend

Dragynn

03/23/10 1:20 PM

#22004 RE: t_b1209 #21994

$8800.00 per ton on the largest anomaly roughly. That's some serious dough. Looks like maybe they struck some veins?

Largest anomaly is 223.75 g/t
28 grams to an ounce (google it), so about 8 ounces per ton
Gold at around 1100.00 an ounce= 8800.00

And a ton is not a lot of dirt/rock, if it's more rock than dirt, a ton is about a pickup load. An $8800.00 pickup load.

How many pickup loads you reckon they can scoop out in a day with some nice big machinery?


All 50 consolidated samples (soils, pits and trenches) were crushed, with a rifle split of 500g and pulverized to -150 mesh. The analytical method used for gold was 50g fire assay with a 0.01 ppm detection limit. Thirty samples out of fifty samples returned consistently background results below the detection limit of 0.01ppm gold. Other samples returned gold values including 0.01 g/t, 0.02g/t, 0.05g/t, 153.75g/t, 195.00g/t and 223.75 g/t Au. The reason for the background values could be possibly due to the thick nature of the overburden, which masks the gold dispersion from the bedrock. Another reason could be the high gold detection limit which was limited to 0.01 g/t Au. A repeat of analyses at a different laboratory is recommended for all samples (retained pulps) using a minimum detection limit of 0.001 g/t (1ppb) Au. The three very anomalous Au values were initially thought to be spurious, but pulp checks were re-assayed and returned consistently similar high grade Au values.